Survival time of post and cores: A 16 year retrospective follow-up study

Jonas Adrian Helmut Vogler; Moritz Lehmann; Peter Rehmann; Bernd Wöstmann

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103923

Survival time of post and cores: A 16 year retrospective follow-up study

J Dent. 2022 Feb:117:103923. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103923. Epub 2021 Dec 23.

Authors

Jonas Adrian Helmut Vogler¹, Moritz Lehmann², Peter Rehmann², Bernd Wöstmann²

Affiliations

¹ Justus Liebig University, Dental Clinic - Department of Prosthodontics, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392 Giessen, Germany. Electronic address: Jonas.A.Vogler@dentist.med.uni-giessen.de.
² Justus Liebig University, Dental Clinic - Department of Prosthodontics, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392 Giessen, Germany.

PMID: 34953973
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103923

Abstract

Objectives: The retrospective survival study (1995-2004) by Balkenhol et al. [1]. led to changes in the decision-making process for treatment with post and cores (special focus on the covering prosthetic restoration while deciding for treatment with post and cores, high primary friction at the try-in stage for conventional cementation, only indirect fabrication technique, no semi-precious alloy) in our clinic. The aim of this study was to examine the influence of these changes on the survival probability.

Materials and methods: In the observation period (2004-2020) 653 patients received in total 953 post and cores. The patient files were analysed due to the parameters: Type of covering prosthetic restoration, location, type of tooth, luting material, post and core material, bone attachment, therapist and cause of failure. According to the previous study the survival probability was assessed using Kaplan-Meyer analysis. Cox regression was used to assess the risk of failure and identify possible covariates.

Results: The average survival time of the post and cores was 10.9 years. The cumulative failure rate was 28.2%. A significant influence on the survival time (Kaplan-Meyer analysis) could be found for the parameters: Type of covering prosthetic restoration, location, type of tooth, post and core material and bone attachment. The multifactorial survival analysis (Cox regression) showed a significant influence of the age of the patient at the time of fitting the post, the type of covering prosthetic restoration and the bone attachment.

Conclusions: The changes in the decision-making process did not lead to a better survival probability.

Clinical significance: The conclusions stated in the previous study were not strict enough. Treatments with post and cores should be critically scrutinized on the basis of covering prosthetic restoration and bone attachment. Post and cores under primary crown retained RPDs should be avoided because of the bad survival probability.

Keywords: Cox regression; Kaplan-Meyer analysis; Post and core; Retrospective study; Survival time.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Cementation
Crowns
Dental Restoration Failure
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Post and Core Technique*
Retrospective Studies